IN THE HIG (206) Manjit Singh State of Punj CORAM : Present:- RAMESH C 1. No.145 date Code, 1860 Bassi. 2. report was p contained in brevity, “19 faced trial. V 1st Class, R sentenced h Section 279 years and to In default of imprisonmen Criminal Ap Vs. State of dismissed on E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA Singh Versus f Punjab : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RA Mr.D.K.Prajapati, Mr.M.S.Josh Mr.Raghujeet Madan, Advocate Mr.Raghav Garg, AAG, Punjab ESH CHANDER DIMRI, J. (Oral) Petitioner Manjit Singh was ar 5 dated 21.10.1997 under Section 27 1860 (for brevity, “1860 Code”) reg After completion of investigat was presented against him. After co ned in Section 207 of the Code of C y, “1973 Code”), he was charge-shee trial. Vide judgment dated 07.10.2004 ass, Rajpura convicted him under s ced him to undergo rigorous impris n 279 of 1860 Code and to undergo to pay a fine of Rs.200/- under Se ault of payment of fine, he was ordere onment for 2 months. Against said nal Appeal No.49-T of 27.10.2004/12. e of Punjab in the Sessions Court sed on 23.01.2009. Aggrieved thereag D HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-1202-2010 Decided on: 26.02.2026 ……Petitioner ..…Respondent RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI S.Joshi, Advocates, for vocate, for the petitioner. unjab. ral) : was arrested in a case bearing FIR tion 279/304-B of the Indian Penal ”) registered at Police Station Dera estigation in the said FIR, a final fter complying with the provisions e of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for sheeted under said sections. He 0.2004, Learned Judicial Magistrate, nder said sections and accordingly imprisonment for 6 months under dergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 der Section 304-A of the said Code. ordered to undergo further rigorous t said conviction/sentence, he filed /12.12.2008 titled as Manjit Singh Court at Patiala. Such appeal was hereagainst, he filed present revision FIR enal Dera final sions (for He e, ingly nder for 2 ode. rous filed gh was ision SAILESH RANJAN 2026.03.06 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document bottom left CRR-1202-2010 -2- petition before this Court, which was admitted on 22.07.2010 and sentence imposed upon him was suspended on that very date. He was ordered to be released on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is accordingly continuing on bail. He also makes a statement at Bar that the petitioner does not challenge said judgment of conviction but leniency may be shown to him in the matter of sentence of imprisonment. 4. Learned AAG, Punjab has filed the custudy certificate dated 24.02.2026 of the petitioner. As per it, he has already undergone a substantive sentence of 1 year, 9 months and 7 days including remissions. 5. Occurrence in question is stated to have taken place in the year 1997. A period of more than 28 years has elapsed. The petitioner is not alleged to have repeated the offences in question, as per the custody certificate. Therefore, considering statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner as also facts/circumstances of the case in question, impugned judgments of conviction are upheld. However, keeping in view period of total sentence already undergone by the petitioner and facts/circumstances involved in the case in question, sentence of imprisonment imposed on him is reduced to the period already undergone. Fine, if he has not paid, will be paid by him before the concerned Magistrate. 6. Present revision petition is partly allowed in the above-stated terms. All interim application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 26.02.2026 (RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI) Sailesh JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes No SAILESH RANJAN 2026.03.06 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document bottom left